The principles of faith, presented

That it may better appear to be unnatural and unreasonable, and not agreeable to holy writ, let me go a little further, how it had its first original; Certainly for the Antiquity of it, it will appear but a Mushroom of yesterday in comparison of Moses division, and Job, Moses contemporary; you cannot find any such Law or practise before Moses, nor long after, but contrary, I am sure from the beginning it was not so. It having had its first institution, when heathen, infidels, or tyrants had the reigns of government in their hand; moved thereunto by tyrannical and ambitious, and Turkish principles, and in continuance of time the evil customs and examples of such came to be imitated by inferiors, and so turned into Laws, it being brought unto us by the Conqueror, our more ancient Laws (as appears by Lucius, following the counsel of Elutherius in making Laws for his Kingdom) was taken out of the word of God, and grounded on the Law of God and nature, and not so much from the Laws of Rome, notwithstanding Caesar in his Come. with other ambitious Romans, attribute so much to themselves for the civilizing of others (as the French now a days for Apish apparel, we being indeed more then baboonish so far to humour them in it, whereby we do not a little undervalue our selves) for saith he, the Laws of Rome; and Caesar may be reproved, but not the Laws of God, as it manifestly appears likewise by our Kentish Gavel kind: And I am sure God gave no such direction at the first, as is manifest by the practise and precept of holy writ before and after Moses, it is clear likewise that Abraham by virtue of the Law of God written in his heart, & the Law of nature, would have divided his real inheritance in the promised Land between Isaac and Ishmael, had he not had a special & extraordinary command (which precept was in relation to the spiritual promise) however those gifts was of such a quantity and quality, that he and his posterity became Princes and Dukes. It is the opinion ⟨p. 9⟩of the learned, that Ishmael was answerable in outward Estate to Isaac, though not in the spiritual promised land, neither was that difference made by Isaac and Jacob to their Children. Moses likewise giveth but a double portion to the eldest;

That it may better appear to be unnaturall and unreasonable, and not agreeable to holy writ, let me go a little further, how it had its first original; Certainly for the Antiquity of it, it will appear but a Mushom of yesterday in comparison of Moses division, and Job, Moses contemporary; you cannot find any such Law or practise before Moses, nor long after, but contrary, I am sure from the beginning it was not so. It having had its first institution, when heathen, infidells, or tyrants had the reignes of government in their hand; moved thereunto by tyrannicall and ambitious, and Turkish principles, and in continuance of time the evill customes and examples of such came to be imitated by inferiors, and so turned into Lawes, it being brought unto us by the Conqueror, our more antient Lawes (as appears by Lucius, following the counsell of Elutherius in making Lawes for his Kingdome) was taken out of the word of God, and grounded on the Law of God and nature, and not so much from the Laws of Rome, notwithstanding Caesar in his Com. with other ambitious Romans, attribute so much to themselves for the civilizing of others (as the French now a daies for Apish apparell, we being indeed more then babonish so far to humour them in it, whereby we do not a little undervalew our selves) for saith he, the Lawes of Rome; and Caesar may be reproved, but not the Laws of God, as it manifestly appeaes likewise by our Kentish Gavel kind: And I am sure God gave no such direction at the first, as is manifest by the practise and precept of holy writ before and after Moses, it is clear likewise that Abraham by vertue of the Law of God written in his heart, & the Law of nature, would have devided his reall inheritance in the promised Land between Isaac and Ishmael, had he not had a special & extraordinary command (which precept was in relation to the spirituall promise) however those gifts was of such a quantity and quality, that he and his posterity became Princes and Dukes. It is the opnion